The Earth is a Globe V the Earth is Flat!

Are we really having this discussion? Yes, we are.

A real scientist looks at everything with an objective lens. It does not matter if there are opposing narratives, everything should be examined and explored to discover the real truths.

Even intelligent people fall into the trap of believing the earth is flat. Though, ultimately, it does not really matter what your perspective is or even what side you are on. We have to look at the most obvious facts.

There are anomalies, that are present when we are trying to make sense of the earth as a globe because the surface we see and perceive around us appears to be flat; even the mountains appear to be a part of this flat surface as a raised terrain. Though we are not taking into account the size of the earth in relation to the size of an individual human being; when we look at the scale it's comparable to an ant trying to make sense of the world around it without science, physics and mathematics.

The Flat Earth Society and the wider community disregard science, physics and mathematics when they find anomalies with the earth is a globe theory. It's actually very easy to disprove the earth is a globe and prove the earth is flat without science, physics and mathematics.

People have resorted to using computing to create models that prove the earth is a globe and there is even documented video evidence of weather balloons going up beyond the upper atmosphere before the signal is lost due to distance away from the earth. Yet, when those in the Flat Earth communities disregard anything related to computing and throw religion into the mix, they quickly shut down any and all evidence in opposition and label it as fake.

I won't do that in opposition to the flat earth theory when looking at those anomalies. Rather, I will look at the facts.

OK, the Flat Earth timezone model makes no sense. The earth is wider at the equator and continues to widen as it reaches the arctic ice wall that surrounds the flat earth's dome structure. This would result in longer distances at the equator for flights of a similar physical distance from countries not at the equator. Yet, as it goes away from the equator towards the ice arctic ice wall, the distances decrease; this is what would happen if the earth were a globe. If it were flat, those distances would continue to increase as it pans out towards the ice wall, but they don't.

I did factor in the Mercator projection distortion and had to look at a real map to see their true position. On the Inverse, I also looked at several of the Flat Earth disc maps with the ice wall and their own models contradict themselves with the distance in relation to flight time in the earth for countries closer to the arctic.

Next, we should seriously look at any flat earth disc map. The Antarctic is dead centre of the map. The Arctic is the ice wall that surrounds the flat earth disc. But, there is a burning question, and it shatters the entire "The Earth is Flat" debate. That burning question is the sun.

The flat earth theory states that the sun, moon and stars are celestial bodies inside the flat earth dome. They move from one side of the dome to the other in a straight line and only change position when the moon's rotation changes according to the passing months, and subsequently the passing years as the stars move.

Regardless of the sun's orbital path according to the months, seasons and years, it always goes across the centre of the flat earth dome. The very centre as I explained before is the Antarctic; it is, without a doubt a place of below zero freezing cold temperatures. Yet, if the sun passed over that region, it would be the hottest part of the flat earth disc, not the coldest.

The equator on a flat earth disc would be colder than the centre, and would not be as hot as it is now.

We have to, of course then explain how the flat earth dome is heated, as it makes no sense with a cold, then hot, then cold set of areas of the dome; it would however if it was a sphere as the two poles are cold and the middle is hot as it's an oblate spheroid that bulges out in the middle at the equator and is as such closer to the sun.

Are you following me?

Now, we can think about the sun as a super hot mass that's quite a distance from the earth. As the earth rotates during a cycle of 24 hours, the areas on the equator are closer to the sun and therefore the sun will reach those areas first before other parts of the world. That is exactly what happens with our world, and the areas that are further away from the sun, as in not on the bulge and close to the axis points are the coldest.

In the polar regions, it takes longer for the sun to reach them, and they usually have longer days and nights than other parts of the world. As such, as they are the furthest away from the sun, they are the coldest as they have less heat.

These are indisputable facts, and any and all flat earth theories to explain around them usually fall flat. I have listened to so many of them, and yet they fail to really explain coherently; mostly the evidence they gather is inconsistent and pieced together to form their flat earth narratives.

As a scientist, I will wait for something concrete, yet I remain skeptical because there are indisputable facts that we have discussed here that can't simply be ignored or dismissed.

It's worth noting that there are other anomalies about the flat earth disc theory in relation to how the celestial objects reset each time. If they were part of the dome, then they would not rotate around in a 360-degree orbit; they would literally crash into the edges of the dome and melt through the arctic ice wall, as well as evaporate the oceans as it reached sea level; it's a super hot mass, that's what it would do.

Oh, but wait, they now say the sun is more like a light source rather than a hot mass. Ok, that explains why it does not melt the ice wall or evaporate the sun, sorta as a bulb can still get hot right? Apparently, that's not relevant. So, where does the dome get the heat from, god? Come on, seriously, is every way to explain an anomaly open-ended? It's like the giant Arctic ice wall. I read other articles and documents from before the Arctic ice wall theory, the ocean spilled out off the disc and into space (really?).

So, where do we get water from so abundantly then, god? That idea could not hold weight, so they invented the giant Arctic ice wall theory and amalgamated it into the flat earth theory as a means to explain what happens with the water.

Without science, physic and maths there is simply no way to explain how a so-called flat earth disc gets heat and why the hot regions are cold, and the cold regions are hot.

I will end this with a note. There are no lizard people living in the centre of the hollow earth that are all serpents and disciples of Satan. God is not a man or even a woman. The word "God" is a man-made concept, like any other words to describe such a being; the same goes with the antichrist.

There is a creator, that is indisputable, and we are all a part of one another. Yet, such a being would have no need for a gender or a fixed physical form, it would be non-corporeal and exist as pure energy.